Frequency-Dependent Selection
Marginal value optimization works best when you're among the first to implement.
Satellite strategy is powerful but not infinitely scalable. Attempting to grow beyond natural carrying capacity forces either abandoning satellite approach or triggering competitive response.
In frequency-dependent selection, a strategy's success depends on how common it is in the population. Rare strategies often outperform common ones because they exploit underused resources. This creates the foraging paradox: when everyone optimizes using the same approach, the 'optimal' patch becomes depleted through competition.
Business Application of Frequency-Dependent Selection
Marginal value optimization works best when you're among the first to implement. Being contrarian - serving 'suboptimal' customers well - can be optimal when everyone else abandons them. The meta-strategy: optimize one level deeper than competitors.
Frequency-Dependent Selection Appears in 4 Chapters
Rare foraging strategies often outperform common ones because they exploit underused resources - the meta-strategy is to optimize one level deeper than competitors.
Frequency dependence in foraging →Forest canopy competition demonstrates frequency-dependent equilibrium - trees stop gaining advantage from additional height when all competitors match their growth.
Frequency-dependent growth limits →Dishonest signaling is profitable when rare but collapses when common, creating stable polymorphism of honest and dishonest signalers in equilibrium.
Frequency-dependent deception →Ruff males maintain 60/30/10 strategy mix because each strategy's success is inversely related to its frequency in the population.
Territorial strategy equilibrium →